DaZur, on 11 November 2013 - 08:32 AM, said:
Maybe it's the new infusion of players but there has been a growing trend of players inferring that linear balance is exactly what MW:O needs (see: BALLISTICS - HOW PGI WENT WRONG BALANCING DIRECT FIRE WEAPONS).
Ah yes, that thread. I think the flaw with that thread is that the creator of it assumed that buffing Autocannons from their TT stats by a larger amount than energy weapons was a bad thing. As it turns out, most ballistics weren't really that good in TT (just Gauss and AC/20 for the most part), so they did naturally need a buff at least somewhat larger than what lasers got. Was the buff too much higher? I dunno. But they did need it at least somewhat higher than lazors got.
DaZur, on 11 November 2013 - 08:32 AM, said:
MW inherently has apex weapons (AC/20, PPC, Gauss) in game-play, absolutely they require a soft-nerf to allow middling weapons to find their niche / roles.
After the changes to PPCs I'm not sure that they're really imbalanced any more, it's just that they tend to benefit from convergence better than a number of other weapons do (they also work better for poptarting and hidey-peeky than lasers). The AC/20 is fine, except perhaps for the triple range thing that all ballistics got (AC/20 does more damage at 450m than an AC/10, which is kind of weird). Gauss is probably fine, I haven't really seen or used it enough to decide. I'd prefer to just buff the little guys like Flamers and Pulse. An overall heat system reform (fast cooling low capacity instead of slow cooling high capacity) is probably what I would prefer to get people using lasers as their main weapons more often than they do now (but while still preserving the usefulness of Autocannons).
DaZur, on 11 November 2013 - 08:32 AM, said:
I believe we are actually in agreeance for once.
How should we celebrate?
How about we play a game of pin the tail on the Urbanmech?
Edited by FupDup, 11 November 2013 - 08:41 AM.